Thursday, December 28, 2006



GW Bush – Loser’s Sweat in Iraq

In pool hall parlance or on the floors of casinos, loser's sweat occurs when a man attempts to recoup his losses by doubling his bets; instead of winning, he continues in a spiral, getting deeper and deeper into debt, foolishly clinging to expectations of winning. When you play this system with dollars, euros or rubles, you are just a fool. An intelligent gambler stops, knows when luck runs against him, and cuts his losses. When the game is played with military forces, it is madness and irresponsible. By throwing more troops into the battle for Iraq, President GW Bush is throwing more lives away with almost no chance of success. Those generals with guts have already told him that – it is defeat in detail, and exactly what happened in Vietnam; Johnson and Westmoreland incrementally escalated US troop deployments into the battle until about 500,000 were deployed and defeated.

Defeat in detail is a concept even the dumbest politician can understand: instead of using massive force initially to overcome and overwhelm the enemy, you dribble forces into battle allowing the enemy to respond and counter your moves. Never having the mass of troops to win decisively, at best, you can hold a status quo; but that is not winning by a long shot – it just bleeding. Generals Powell and Abizaid have given Bush this information. Unlike Powell at the UN, Abizaid now has chosen to retire rather than execute GW Bush's corrupt orders.

Neocon Kenneth Adelman, the blowhard with the worst taste in ties on TV who sold "Cakewalk In Iraq", has declared that if the Surge does not work, he thinks we should get out Iraq. Uncertain whether Adelman knows the difference between tin soldiers and those with flesh and blood. Like his disturbing choice of sartorial splendor, you can bet he has no idea what is going on in Iraq. "Dead Wrong Twice" is the new nickname he has pending. Hopeless Henry Kissinger, who still pads around the White House on a regular basis, is probably one of the fathers to the crackpot Surge concept. Does anyone believe he will get anything right on Earth before his time comes to start advising celestial deities? Neocons have been consistently wrong on Iraq. If the consequences of their misjudgments were not so deadly, you could enjoy the absurdity of their calls. What ever happened to their pet Snake Ahmed Chalabi when they need him?

Apart from the projected failure of the so called McCain-Liebermann Neocon Surge policy, is GWB's frantic tactics used to justify this reinforcement strategy in Iraq. GW Bush has told us repeatedly in his cheer leading period that he takes advice from his combat commanders in war... but he now has a new caveat: that is, if my commanders agree with my neocon pals. He has sent Mr. Vanilla Bob Gates, his freshly minted SECDEF, to Iraq to find support. Gates had to look high and low. He got no support from the Iraqi leadership, such as it is. He did find support from some handpicked enlisted men and from generals probably looking for another star, but the trip was at best a flop. The top level generals in Iraq told Vanilla Bob what the Joint Chiefs told him: Tell us what the Mission is for the augmented brigades and we will consider it. Gates finally got General Casey to agree that he would not interpose objections for additional troops. How luke warm can you get and stay on active duty? Apparently, tepid obedience is the price of future glory for General Casey. As far as Gates, the the Pentagon brass will find that the new SECDEF follows directives fervently from the president, like a nun follows holy edicts... If Rumsfeld drove the generals crazy with his shallow, aggressive hubris, Gates will try to bore them into compliance. Gates’ promotion to SECDEF is the triumph of the super clerk over leadership. Do not expect him to purge DOD of the pernicious neocons and Israeli Defense Force imbeds – that would take leadership.

Despite a mandate by the voters to end the Iraqi war in the mid-term elections, the many congressional Democrats, at least those who take gold from the Israeli Lobbyists, prefer political hari kari than to confront their rich, powerful campaign donors. They too quickly buy into the refrain that we have to support the troops; and therefore, we cannot control the expenditures for the war through budget constraints. This is a cowardly cop out and a bought and paid position. If they wish to protect the troops, get them out of harms way and end the pointless war – set up political/military milestones that if not met, choke off the funds. If you expect GW Bush to end the war, forget it. He takes orders from the neocons who want permanent war in the Middle East to project their own objectives. And at the same time, poor GWB will hold on at all costs until the end of his term with the hope of blaming defeat on the next elected commander in chief.

Al Qaida has offered Bush a one month truce to exit his troops and 70,000 civilian contractors from Iraq – an audacious propaganda ploy that Bush cannot accept, but it does question the argument that he needs extended time to redeploy. It is an invitation to surrender – all heavy equipment is to remain in country as bases are turned over to Iraqi insurgents. This is what Bush's faces unless he can figure out a more graceful exit while his combat power in country is not more dissipated. To join the insurgency, all you need to do is learn three Sura verses by heart from the Koran and you will be paid by the insurgents. What is the offer from the Iraqi Army to join up? So there are choices for Iraqis who regard the current government as a puppet of the occupation.

A mission for the Surge? More of the same or will there be a determined effort to unhorse el Sadr and his militia? US has turned Najaf over to the Iraqi Army and that is where el Sadr hangs out. The US Main Supply Route can be closed by the militias and to keep it open under continuous fire will be more costly than it is now. So far the number one Ayatollah Sistani who speaks Arabic with a Farsi accent, has not dropped his handkerchief for US troops to remain in Iraq, nor will he support Bush's moves for a unified Iraqi government. It is just a more stupid, BRING THEM ON.

This whole Iraq war has taken on a surrealistic fog. It is as if the Vietnam debacle never occurred – no lessons learned. The Bush administration with its generals move in detached, dream-like scenarios that pay little attention to the devastating results their bloody actions inflict on themselves and their adversaries. Colonel Robert E Bartos USA RET

1 Comments:

Anonymous W.LindsayWheeler said...

I beg to differ about Vietnam. Vietnam was not a failure at all. We won the Tet offensive. It was going to be downhill ever since then. The Viet Cong were destroyed. It was a gamble that failed.

In th 1950's American cargo planes carried thousands of Vietnamese Catholics from Hanoi to Saigon. Communists were killing Catholics everywhere in the country, especially in the North.

"Outraged at the brutalities of the Republicans, aided by the Russians, in the Spanish Civil War, he (Jesuit Enrico Rosa) deplored the fact that hundreds of the clergy had been murdered; religious buildings had been burned; nuns raped; priests mutilated."

The same thing was going on in Vietnam!

A European soldier fights under the banner of Christ. Communism is anti-European and anti-Christian.

Vietnam was lost by Leftist propaganda in this country, by Leftist Academics that controlled the minds of the youth and these Leftists who HAD MORE SOLIDARITY WITH THEIR COMMUNIST BRETHREN IN VIETNAM. The Hippie movement was nothing but a Bohemian cult movement, Leftist to its core. Willie Brown glorified the fact that him and American Academia caused the withdrawal of American forces and the defeat of South Vietnam.

Judases anybody? We have a whole wing of our society that is Judas. It is these Judases that brought about our withdrawal in Vietnam.

Vietnam was not a wrong war just as Generalismo Franco was right in what he did for God, King and Country. It may have not been fought well strategically but it was a right war that was tragically lost.

It was the Democratic Congress, It was the American Socialist Party, It was the Democratic Party that forbid help to the South Vietnam government of even air support to stop North Vietnamese aggression.

The essence of the Left is effeminacy--softness. The Left is Nihilist.

We lost Vietnam because we don't have nor we will ever have, what the ancient Greeks called, "homousia" (likemindedness) in America. FDR had to engineer the Japanese Attack on Pearl Harbor in order to end resistance to a European War.

Communism is a Nihilist movement. Nihilism is the root of revolution and it has to be fought everywhere. Nihilism is about destroying the Old Order.

Post the work of Goya, Napoleon was a son of the French Revolution, the godfather of Communism.

The American and French revolutions were both acts of Nihilism; i.e. the destruction of the Old Order.

12:30  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home